The reason we don’t translate into a national language is because it is a second language, and therefore less understood, than a mother tongue. There is a “clearing of a mist” type of revelation when a reader reads Scripture in the language they learned from birth.
A new alphabet isn’t always invented. Here in Indonesia, my colleagues use the alphabet used for the national language.
An example of the first topic however: my gardener started working for us when he left his village in the interior highlands here in Papua to finish his education at a national high school. In the meantime, the translation team in the highlands, which included his father, one of the head men of the village, worked at completing the New Testament. The gardener was literate in both the national languages and his village language. When the NT was completed and dedicated, the young man’s joy was unrestrained. It was “lebih terang”, more light, in his words.
I rejoiced, and am still rejoicing, that after almost 2000 years, he could read God’s Love Letter to him
Take Papau New Guinea 7 million people. In 2010 Lutheran Bible Translators completed the Bible in the Haruai language of which there are a mere 2000 people who speak it.
I question the use of resources to teach a man to read a language that only 0.03% of the entire island speak -vs- teaching him to read a language if he is illiterate. And if he is literate then he can already read the Bible in the language he can read.
No need to reach agreement thats just how I see it.